Spelling suggestions: "subject:"J L austin"" "subject:"J L dustin""
1 |
Adventures in Fictionality: Sites along the Border between Fiction and RealityTrauvitch, Rhona 01 May 2013 (has links)
This project is a narratological study of the border between fiction and reality, and the traversing thereof. I postulate that the permeability of this border is the consequence of textual acts: Cataloged Fabulations, Second-tier Fictionals, and Rhizomatic Fabrications. These are akin to speech acts in that fictional entities gain nonfictional status by means of an implicit contract at the heart of the textual act. Having laid out the narratological foundation of the textual acts' power, I argue that the narratological bears on the ontological through performative speech acts, as portrayed in J. L. Austin's tripartite model.
I use two lenses in my analysis: the work of Jorge Luis Borges and the Hebrew Bible and its commentaries. The Borgesian trifecta is encyclopedia, mirror, and labyrinth, referents that are synonymous with the three textual acts noted above. In terms of the biblical lens, my analysis focuses on a metaphor family in Jewish mysticism. This family includes the World as Book, The Torah as Blueprint, God as Author, and Letters as Building Blocks. The resulting conceptual system is narratological in nature. Consequently it is useful to draw on this system so as to elucidate the field of narratology. The binoculars offer a parallax view, which provides a unique perspective on narratology: the combination of modernist/postmodernist fantasy and the urtext of the Western literary canon.
|
2 |
Designing in Emerging Media through Linguistic FormsWelch, Jonathan D. January 2017 (has links)
No description available.
|
3 |
Meaning : the move from minds to practicesSloss, Jay January 2007 (has links)
For centuries referential theories of language and meaning have dominated Western philosophy. The idea that noises and scratches become meaningful words and writing by virtue of a mental grasp one has on the referents they are talking about has become deeply entrenched. Starting with Plato, and reinvented by Locke, contemporary theorists continue to reproduce this mental fix requirement (MFR) in their philosophies of language and intentionality-Physicalists, such as Paul and Patricia Churchland are typical. Plato, Locke and the Churchlands all share the view that bits of language reach out to extra-linguistic entities by some act of mind (for Plato the mind grasped referents via the Forms, for Locke Ideas bridged the relation, and the Churchland's, brain states). In each case a self-referential mental act gets language up and running, i.e. mental connections (or representations) to referents do the trick. My question also concerns what makes squiggles and noises meaningful. The question is a nested one-ancillary to it are questions of what makes language work? How do words mean or relate to the world? How do speakers mean certain things and not others? I will approach the question from a contextualist perspective where roles in rule-governed activities are the bottom line, not representations in the mind/brain.
|
4 |
結構性宰制:反反色情到反分級 / Structural domination: from anti-antipornography to anti-censorship黃頌竹 Unknown Date (has links)
言論分級的辦法,特別是與性有關的言論分級,往往持著「保護未成年人」的立場落實於政策中。將這種對未成年人的言論限制手段,透過個人道德的論述,建構成一個對於未成年人之人格及人身安全的保護措施。然而在這個巧妙的論述之下,卻掩蓋不住底下騷動不已的權力角逐。
回顧二十世紀八○年代的反色情女性主義論述,麥金儂直接指出「色情」的問題從來就不只是一個道德問題,而是關於政治、關於權力、關於社會結構的問題。事實是,種種對於未成年人可以接觸的資訊、言論施加之限制,也從來都不只是道德問題,而是(如女性主義者尖銳而正確的見解指出的)一個關於政治、權力、結構的問題。言論不只是意見,言論是具有能動性(agency)的。麥金儂表示言論對於社會現實的建構有著莫大的影響力,藍騰更使用奧斯汀的行動(performativity)理論來說明言論的能力。而巴特勒儘管在結論上反對反色情女性主義推動言論管制,卻也是基於肯定言論的行動力,對於言論管制往往剝奪傷害性言論的受害者在言說場域裡能夠自我賦權的機會,更透過公權力對此類言論與歧視結構的肯認,而有強化這個受害者結構的危機。
我將從巴特勒對言論管制手段的批判,以及對於如何透過言說關係的再利用,來試圖顛覆既有的權力關係。現有的所謂「保護」未成年人之言論限制政策,其實一方面是鞏固成年人對未成年人之權力關係,另一方面也是將未成年人的教育視為成年人彼此爭奪權力的場域。我將論證言論的管制策略不僅無法達到「保護」的效果,更是對未成年人之主體性建立的直接傷害:如果言論有建構社會結構,以及建構主體在社會結構中的位置之能力,剝奪這項能力,就是在剝奪未成年人透過性言論與現實世界進行交互辯證的能力,並剝奪其建立以及發展自我主體性之重要工具。
|
Page generated in 0.042 seconds